2007-08-02 04:00:00 PDT Washington -- Sen. Barbara Boxer said Wednesday she would not support a $250,000 limit on farmers receiving federal crop subsidies, saying it would be a disaster for the state's cotton and rice growers.

"It's not an easy issue for California," Boxer said. "We have our rice people and we have our cotton people."

In a wide-ranging interview with California reporters, Boxer accused President Bush of having a "seething hatred" of Congress, and said because of the Iraq war California's National Guard is not equipped to respond to a major earthquake or flood.

Boxer, an ardent supporter of environmental programs who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, voiced support for the five-year $286 billion farm bill that passed the House last week that would limit payments to farmers earning more than $1 million a year, or $2 million for a couple.

The bill drew sharp criticism from many environmental and food activists as well as economists and budget groups who said it largely leaves intact Depression-era crop subsidies that send billions of dollars a year to the nation's wealthiest growers of five commodities - cotton, rice, corn, wheat and soybeans - at the expense of environmental and nutrition programs.

The Senate is expected to write its version of the farm bill this fall. Several senators in both parties said they would take a different approach and limit federal subsidies to $250,000 a year per farmer.

Cotton and rice growers are the top recipients of crop subsidies in California, collecting almost $1 billion in payments from 2003 to 2005, according to federal data compiled by Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization.

San Francisco arts patron Constance Bowles received the most money of any individual Californian during that time, collecting $1.2 million in largely cotton payments for a family farming operation in Los Banos (Merced County).

Boxer said she and her California colleague, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, also a Democrat, supported a $2.5 million income limit in the last farm bill in 2002. "We got a lot of heat from the reformers," Boxer said, "but we felt that we want to put limits on, but let's just do it a little slower."

Residual straw from rice production could help produce cellulosic ethanol, Boxer said.

"Besides the fact that it's a huge business and a huge export, we also have the opportunity here if things go the way I think they will go, for cellulosic fuels to be developed out of the rice straw," Boxer said. "So I don't want to give these crops a bad name, because they have some really great potential."

Feinstein, in a prepared statement, said subsidies should be cut, "but I would like to wait to see what the committee bill looks like, and the rationale for it, before I make a final decision. The Senate will not take up the farm bill until the fall, and the committee has not yet circulated draft legislation."

Activists see the huge farm bill as a rich pot of money and land that could be used instead to improve the environment and the American diet. More than a quarter of California's land - 27.6 million acres - is in agriculture. Half the continental United States is farmland, and more than 150 million acres were enrolled in conservation programs in 2005.

Such programs to improve wildlife habitat, watersheds and the like can be used by all farmers, not just growers of the five subsidized commodities, but they are heavily oversubscribed because there is not enough money in the budget to meet the demand. California growers of cotton, rice, dairy, corn and wheat received more than $1.1 billion from 2003 to 2005; farm conservation programs got roughly $63 million during that period.

Only about 10 percent of California farmers grow crops eligible for subsidies.

Bay Area food activists, leading a growing national movement, also want to divert money from crop subsidies to local farm markets, organics and fruit and vegetable purchases for federal nutrition programs such as school lunches.

"We hope we can have this conversation with Sen. Boxer before she makes a final decision on how she views the commodity subsidy programs," said Jim Lyons, policy vice president at Oxfam America, a development group. "It's really a decision as to who should benefit from these taxpayer dollars. Should it be wealthy farmers who have realized this windfall for some time, or other producers who are really in need of additional support and a safety net?"

Scott Faber, farm policy campaign director for Environmental Defense, said only "11 farmers" collected more than $250,000 in 2005, and one those "farmers" was the Nature Conservancy, so lower payment limits would have little effect on California farmers.

California cotton and rice groups did not respond in time for comment.

Cotton subsidies have also been ruled illegal by the World Trade Organization, which last week gave permission to Brazil to retaliate against U.S. exports, which might affect other U.S. export industries.

On the National Guard issue, Boxer wrote to Bush Wednesday expressing alarm at a letter she received from the Army secretary, Pete Geren, that the California National Guard has the capacity to respond to smaller missions, but "equipment shortages could potentially limit their capability to fully respond to large scale emergencies such as a catastrophic earthquake or flood."

Geren said California's Guard does have an informal agreement with Nevada and Oregon to assist in a catastrophe.

Boxer said the state is $1 billion short of trucks and other equipment that has been sent to Iraq.